4.2 Gettier problems and their implications
3 min read•august 9, 2024
Gettier problems shake up our understanding of knowledge. They show how justified true beliefs can fall short, challenging the idea that these three elements are enough for knowledge. This revelation sparked debates about luck's role in what we know.
Philosophers scrambled to patch up the theory of knowledge after Gettier. They proposed new conditions and reassessed how justification works. These problems still influence how we think about knowledge today.
Gettier and His Counterexamples
Gettier's Challenge to Traditional Knowledge Theory
Top images from around the web for Gettier's Challenge to Traditional Knowledge Theory
Sociology of knowledge - Wikiquote View original
Is this image relevant?
Definitions of knowledge - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
File:Belief venn diagram.png - Wikimedia Commons View original
Is this image relevant?
Sociology of knowledge - Wikiquote View original
Is this image relevant?
Definitions of knowledge - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Gettier's Challenge to Traditional Knowledge Theory
Sociology of knowledge - Wikiquote View original
Is this image relevant?
Definitions of knowledge - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
File:Belief venn diagram.png - Wikimedia Commons View original
Is this image relevant?
Sociology of knowledge - Wikiquote View original
Is this image relevant?
Definitions of knowledge - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
- published "Is Knowledge?" in 1963
- Paper presented counterexamples to the traditional tripartite theory of knowledge
- Tripartite theory defines knowledge as justified true belief
- Gettier cases demonstrate scenarios where justified true beliefs fail to qualify as knowledge
- occurs when a person holds a true belief for reasons unrelated to its truth
Structure and Impact of Gettier Cases
- Gettier cases typically involve a person forming a justified belief based on false evidence
- By coincidence, the belief turns out to be true, despite the faulty justification
- Cases highlight the role of luck in knowledge acquisition
- Two famous Gettier examples include the "" and "" scenarios
- Job Seeker case involves Smith believing Jones will get a job, but Smith unknowingly gets it instead
- Fake Barn case involves a person correctly identifying a barn in an area full of barn facades
Philosophical Implications of Gettier Problems
- Gettier cases challenge the sufficiency of justified true belief for knowledge
- Reveal potential gaps in our understanding of justification and its relationship to truth
- Sparked debates about the nature of knowledge and
- Led philosophers to propose additional conditions for knowledge (, sensitivity, safety)
- Raised questions about the reliability of our belief-forming processes
Implications for Justification and Knowledge
Epistemic Luck and Its Role in Knowledge
- Epistemic luck refers to chance factors influencing the truth or justification of beliefs
- Gettier cases demonstrate how luck can undermine knowledge claims
- Types of epistemic luck include (truth-related) and (justification-related)
- Philosophers debate whether any form of luck is compatible with genuine knowledge
- Attempts to eliminate luck from knowledge led to theories like sensitivity and safety conditions
Reassessing Justification in Light of Gettier Problems
- Gettier cases question the reliability of justification in guaranteeing knowledge
- Internalist vs. externalist approaches to justification emerged in response
- focuses on factors within the believer's cognitive perspective
- emphasizes objective reliability of belief-forming processes
- proposes knowledge requires justification that cannot be defeated by additional true information
Knowledge Attribution and Epistemological Theories
- Gettier problems influenced how we attribute knowledge in everyday and philosophical contexts
- Led to more nuanced analyses of when we can legitimately claim to "know" something
- Sparked development of of knowledge attribution
- emerged as an alternative to contextualism
- Raised questions about the value of knowledge over mere true belief
Key Terms to Review (17)
Accidental True Belief: Accidental true belief refers to a situation where a person holds a belief that is true, but the truth of the belief is not due to the person's justification or knowledge. This concept raises important questions about the nature of knowledge and what it means to truly know something, especially in the context of Gettier problems, which challenge the traditional definition of knowledge as justified true belief.
Contextualist theories: Contextualist theories propose that the truth value of knowledge claims can vary depending on the context in which they are made. This means that what counts as knowledge may change based on various factors, such as the situation, the stakes involved, or the standards of justification being applied. This approach directly addresses the challenges posed by Gettier problems, which illustrate that having justified true belief does not necessarily equate to knowledge.
Defeasibility theory: Defeasibility theory is a concept in epistemology that suggests that a belief can be justified until it is shown to be false or undermined by new evidence. This theory emphasizes that knowledge is not absolute and can be challenged or overridden by further information, thereby highlighting the dynamic nature of justification and belief. It plays a critical role in understanding the implications of Gettier problems, which reveal situations where justified true belief does not equate to knowledge.
Edmund Gettier: Edmund Gettier is a philosopher best known for his challenge to the traditional definition of knowledge, famously presenting Gettier problems that illustrate situations where one can have justified true belief without having knowledge. His work brought to light the complications in defining knowledge and the implications for epistemology, leading to further discussions about what constitutes knowledge beyond mere belief and justification.
Epistemic luck: Epistemic luck refers to the idea that a person's justification for a belief may be affected by factors outside their control, leading to a situation where they arrive at true beliefs by chance rather than through reliable reasoning. This concept challenges the traditional view of knowledge, suggesting that even if someone believes something true and has justification, they may still lack genuine knowledge due to luck playing a role in their belief formation. Understanding epistemic luck is essential when discussing issues like Gettier problems and the reliability of belief-forming processes.
Externalism: Externalism is a theory in epistemology that asserts that the justification of a belief can depend on factors outside an individual's mental states or access to information. This approach highlights the role of external factors, such as social context, environmental influences, and the reliability of the belief-forming processes, in determining whether a belief is justified or constitutes knowledge.
Fake barn: A fake barn is a thought experiment used in epistemology to illustrate issues of knowledge and justified belief. It represents a scenario where a person sees what looks like a barn in a landscape filled with fake barns, leading to questions about whether they truly know they are seeing a real barn despite having a justified belief based on their observation. This scenario connects deeply with discussions around Gettier problems, as it highlights the complexity of knowledge when justified true beliefs might still lack genuine knowledge.
Gettier Problem: The Gettier Problem refers to situations where a person has a belief that is both justified and true, yet still fails to qualify as knowledge due to the presence of luck or coincidence. This challenges the traditional understanding of knowledge as justified true belief by showing that having these three components is not sufficient for knowledge.
Internalism: Internalism is a position in epistemology that asserts that the justification for a belief must be accessible to the believer's own consciousness. This means that the reasons and evidence that support a belief must be within the individual's mental grasp, emphasizing the internal aspects of justification over external factors.
Job Seeker: A job seeker is an individual actively searching for employment opportunities, often utilizing various resources and strategies to find a suitable job. This term highlights the actions and efforts individuals take in navigating the job market, including assessing their skills, preparing resumes, networking, and applying for positions. Understanding the challenges faced by job seekers can provide insights into the broader implications of knowledge and belief in relation to securing employment.
Justified True Belief: Justified true belief is a traditional definition of knowledge which posits that for someone to truly know something, three conditions must be met: the belief must be true, the person must believe it, and there must be justification for that belief. This concept helps clarify the intricate relationship between knowledge and belief, and it plays a critical role in discussions about what constitutes knowledge and how we can claim to possess it.
No False Lemmas: The term 'no false lemmas' refers to a criterion in epistemology that demands the justification of beliefs must not rely on any false propositions. This concept is crucial for ensuring that knowledge claims are genuine and not based on erroneous assumptions or misleading information. It highlights the importance of accuracy in the reasoning process that leads to belief formation, reinforcing the need for reliable justification in knowledge acquisition.
Reflective Luck: Reflective luck refers to a situation in epistemology where a person's knowledge or justified belief is influenced by luck rather than their own skills or abilities. This concept highlights the problematic nature of knowledge claims that arise when the justification for those beliefs is not robustly connected to the truth of what is believed, raising questions about the reliability of such knowledge.
Safety Condition: The safety condition is a principle in epistemology that states for a belief to qualify as knowledge, it must not only be true, but also safe from being false in nearby possible worlds. This means that if someone believes something based on a reliable process, it should be unlikely to be mistaken in similar situations, addressing concerns raised by skeptical scenarios and the Gettier problem.
Sensitivity condition: The sensitivity condition is a criterion in epistemology that states that if a person knows a proposition, then they must not only be justified in believing it but also that their belief must be sensitive to the truth of the proposition. This means that if the proposition were false, the person would not believe it. This condition plays a significant role in discussions about knowledge, particularly in addressing issues raised by Gettier problems and shaping post-Gettier theories. It is also crucial in evaluating the impact of external factors on knowledge claims and in assessing the reliability of truth-conducive processes.
Subject-sensitive invariantism: Subject-sensitive invariantism is a theory of knowledge that suggests that whether a person knows a proposition can depend on the subject's particular circumstances, while still maintaining that the truth conditions for knowledge remain invariant. This means that factors such as practical interests or stakes can influence the knowledge attribution to an individual, differing from traditional invariantist views where knowledge is solely based on objective conditions.
Veritic Luck: Veritic luck refers to the idea that a person's belief can be true due to luck rather than a justified reason or reliable process. It highlights how sometimes people can stumble upon true beliefs without having a solid foundation of knowledge or justification, challenging the traditional notion of knowledge as 'justified true belief.' This concept is crucial in understanding Gettier problems, which expose the limitations of the justified true belief model by illustrating situations where one can possess a true belief through luck.